See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/225382043

Performance of a floating treatment wetland for in-stream water

amelioration in NE Italy

Article  in  Hydrobiologia · October 2011

DOI: 10.1007/s10750-011-0730-4

CITATIONS READS

104 1,333

4 authors, including:

Davide Tocchetto Maurizio Borin

davidetocchetto.it University of Padova
5 PUBLICATIONS   207 CITATIONS    203 PUBLICATIONS   2,925 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

ecosystem services from farmland View project

wall cascade constructed wetland View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Maurizio Borin on 06 June 2014.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

Hydrobiologia (2011) 674:157–167
DOI 10.1007/s10750-011-0730-4
WETLAND RESTORATION
Performance of a floating treatment wetland for in-stream
water amelioration in NE Italy
G. De Stefani • D. Tocchetto • M. Salvato •
M. Borin
Published online: 18 May 2011
Ó Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2011
Abstract Floating treatment wetlands are innova-
tive systems and their processes are still scarcely
known within the traditional methods of phytodepu-
ration. To gain initial information on their perfor-
mance and potential in removing pollutants, two
experiments have been conducted in northeast Italy,
in a Natural Park with resurgent water. Barriers
formed by a new patented floating element were
tested in real climatic and water flow conditions. One
experiment was conducted in a channel receiving
aquaculture effluents, while the other was set in two
cleaner channels to test two installation designs (two
barriers composed of two lines of elements—2 9 2
design and two composed of three lines of ele-
ments—2 9 3 design). Different macrophyte species
were used (Phragmites australis, Carex elata, Juncus
effusus, Typha latifolia, Chrysopogon zizanioides,
Sparganium erectum, and Dactylis glomerata). The
floating systems were easily installed and required
few maintenance operations. Native plants grew
Guest editors: Dominik Zak, Robert McInnes, Jörg Gelbrecht /
Restoration, biogeochemistry and ecological services of
wetlands
G. De Stefani (&)
M. Salvato
M. Borin
Department of Environmental Agronomy and Crop
Production, University of Padova, Padova, Italy
e-mail: giovannadestefani@libero.it
D. Tocchetto
PAN srl, Spin Off at Padova University, Padova, Italy
successfully, developing roots 90–135 cm deep
1 year after planting. Conversely, Chrysopogon ziza-
nioides showed scarce adaptation to local conditions.
In the first experiment, median chemical oxygen
demand (COD) in water passing through the floating
wetland system was reduced by 66%, biochemical
oxygen demand by 52%, and total phosphorus by
65%. In the second experiment, the 2 9 3 design had
a slightly better performance than 2 9 2 in reducing
COD (38 and 28% of removal, respectively). The two
designs performed similarly on NO3-N, reducing the
incoming concentrations by 12% (2 9 3 design) and
14% (2 9 2). This form of nitrogen represents almost
all the total nitrogen, which was abated by 13% by
the 2 9 3 design and by 29% by 2 9 2 design.
Keywords Floating treatment wetland
River water
treatment
Macrophytes
Aquaculture effluents
Introduction
Floating treatment wetlands (FTW) are innovative
within the traditional methods of phytodepuration.
These systems employ rooted, emergent plants
growing as a floating mat on the water surface rather
than in the sediments (Headley & Tanner, 2006). This
technique complements natural floating wetlands,
defined by Sasser et al. (1991) as a marsh of vascular
vegetation having a significant mat of live and dead
roots, peat and detritus, that floats over a layer of free
123
158
water. Due to the fact that the system can float, plants
are not affected by fluctuations in water levels, so
FTW have several applications and are used espe-
cially in ponds or rivers. It is possible to use
nonfloating plants highly efficient in terms of water
purification, with a well-developed rooting system
and impossible for plants to escape from the area
allocated for treatment and colonize space in the
water body. Furthermore, FTW can operate at greater
water depth than conventional wetlands, and are thus
able to achieve a higher level of treatment.
In nature, floating wetlands exist that consist of a
floating organic mat supporting plant growth, where
the self-buoyancy is made possible by the entrapment
within the matrix of gases generated by anaerobic
metabolism and the presence of air spaces in the roots
of certain plant species (Hogg & Wein, 1988).
Floating treatment wetlands are artificially created
systems using various ways to trap macrophytes in
self-buoyant mats. They may sustain suitable plants,
which are able to extend their roots in the water
column, in still or running waters, and perform the
typical functions: physical filtering of the water flow,
dissolved nutrients uptake and support for microor-
ganisms. Vegetation absorbs nutrients transformed
into simple elements dissolved in water column. This
action is performed by bacterial communities which
grow on the root system and that live in symbiosis
with plants. It is thus important to use different
botanical species so that different bacterial colonies
develop that will help organic macromolecules’
degradation. Purification efficiencies of phytodepu-
ration systems depend on the types of plants used,
local climate conditions, the type of system adopted,
maintenance performed and several other technical,
ecological, and microbiological factors.
Floating systems developed around the world have
performed well in pollution control (removing sus-
pended solids (SS), nitrogen (N), phosphorus (P),
biochemical oxygen demand (BOD), chemical oxy-
gen demand (COD), and metals in particular) and in
the creation of new water environments. The main
applications in terms of water quality improvement
are for storm water, sewage, acid mine drainage,
piggery effluent, poultry processing wastewater, and
water supply reservoirs (Headley & Tanner, 2006). A
famous system for storm water runoff treatment has
been operating at Heathrow Airport since 1994, to
remove mainly glycol and associated BOD. The
123
Hydrobiologia (2011) 674:157–167
treatment system consists of different components
and the floating reed-beds achieved a BOD removal
efficiency of 43% (Revitt et al., 2001). Van Acker
et al. (2005) describe a floating system in Belgium for
treatment of combined sewer overflows and give
these pollutant removal results: COD 33–68%, SS
66–95%, total P 61% and a variable total N removal
due probably to the anaerobic condition of the water
beneath the floating island. Another example of this
kind of depuration is the work of Van de Moortel
(2008) conducted at Ghent University, Belgium; the
results of treatment performance in percentages were:
total N 44%, ammonia N 34%, total P 31%, and COD
49%. Dealing with acid mine drainage, the problem is
the huge amount of metals (copper and zinc) and
sulfates; Smith & Kalin (2000) provide data of some
applications in Canada. Hubbard et al. (2004) used a
floating system for treatment of swine lagoon waste-
water and the calculated percentages of nutrients
removed from the root zone by the floating mats
were: total N 43–52%, total P 34–41%, K 127–160%
(Calculations of percent nutrient removal were made
assuming a set rooting zone depths, where is greater
than 100 natural mixing of nutrients within the
experiment tank would have provided nutrients in
addition (Hubbard et al., 2004).) An example of river
treatment from wastewater comes from China, on the
Pearl River in Guangzhou. The parameters measured
before and after the floating wetland gave the
following data in depuration efficiency: total N
removal was 50%, ammonia nitrogen oxidation
100%, nitrate nitrogen removal 22%, and COD
removal 95% in 5 days of retention (Lianpeng
et al., 2009). Constructed wetland to remove aqua-
culture effluents has been also investigated (Ying
Feng et al., 2002; Schulz et al., 2003). Nakamura &
Shimatani (1997) report on the entire ecosystem
created around the installation of a floating island on
Lake Kasumigaura in Japan, where they found new
bird and fish species and other aquatic animals, and
noted landscape improvement.
Different materials are used to set up the floating
structures, which need to have some important
features such as buoyancy, durability, anchoring,
flexibility, environmental sensitivity, easy installa-
tion, and affordability. The structures that guarantee
buoyancy can be sealed polyvinyl chloride or poly-
propylene pipes, polystyrene sheets, bamboo, inflat-
able vinyl pillows, polystyrene foam in a polyester
Hydrobiologia (2011) 674:157–167
matrix, and the internal structure can be filled with
coconut fiber, bamboo reed net, or other material. It is
possible to have frames that support a growth
medium for the plants, but in others these are planted
directly into the floating mats without additional
planting media (Hoeger, 1988; Smith & Kalin, 2000;
Hubbard et al., 2004).
The choice of vegetation species used for floating
treatment wetlands is fundamental for good results
from these phytodepuration systems. Many interna-
tional studies state that botanical species utilized for
phytodepuration must have a high capacity to absorb
nutrients. The most suitable species are emergent
macrophytes. These are aquatic plants growing in
wetlands, shallow lakes, and streams and that are
either emergent, submergent, or floating. They include
the aquatic angiosperms (flowering plants), pterido-
phytes (ferns), and bryophytes (mosses, hornworts,
and liverworts). It is recommended to select native
species that occur locally and exhibit vigorous growth
in polluted waters under local climatic conditions
(Headley & Tanner, 2006). The most common species
used for floating treatment wetlands are Phragmites
australis (common reed), Typha latifolia (cattail),
Juncus effusus (soft rush), Iris pseudacorus (yellow
flag), Carex spp., Glyceria maxima (sweet manna-
grass), Canna indica (Indian shot, canna), and Chry-
sopogon zizanioides (vetiver grass), but a broad range
of plants are suitable for these purposes.
The above review shows that the FTW is a
promising solution for improving the quality of
surface water bodies, but local conditions can
strongly affect the performances. Since this system
Fig. 1 Tech-IA system single element and scheme of treatment process
159
has never been applied in Italy, two experiments were
conducted during 2005–2008 to test a patented
floating element in river stream conditions by eval-
uating plant adaptation and depuration efficiency,
monitoring N, P forms and COD.
Materials and methods
Floating element
The floating structure used in these studies was
developed as a prototype in 2004 and upgraded after
a test period; in 2006 the patent was applied for at the
Italian Patent Office (Tech-IAÒ). The single self-
floating element of Tech-IAÒ (Fig. 1) is produced in
ethylene vinyl acetate (EVA), rectangular (50 9
90 cm), with eight windows each of which has grids
to sustain plants. The mass is 1.7 kg supporting a load
capacity up to 20 kg. Two matched elements give
1 m2 of raft. The presence of six holes in its frame
means that the single elements can be easily connected
to each other and to the riverbanks. The elements can
be easily installed in different designs to fit the shape
of the water body and intercept the pollutant flow.
The most important features of these structure are
the high mechanical resistance of the material
associated with biological, chemical, and weather
resistance. His internal structure not allows to absorb
water, moreover these elements are easy to install and
manage and are made of recyclable material.
The floating element can be vegetated with
herbaceous species with colorful flowers and these
123
160
can be distributed to bloom at different seasons, it can
be used for ornamental purposes and become a
perfect element of urban fittings. The structure was
created to be a support in phytodepuration for
nonfloating plants, but it can be used in several other
sectors. It could become a vegetated island for natural
and faunal purposes, floating vegetated or nonvege-
tated barriers used for delimitation or signaling. But,
it can be used also as a decorative island in a natural,
artificial, private, or public water body, a support for
plants growing in hydroponic culture, creation of
buoyant platforms, and as a support for fish-farming
environments.
Vegetation
The species used in the experiments are aquatic
emergent or sub-emergent plants, chosen among
those that can survive in the environmental condi-
tions of northeast Italy.
Phragmites australis (Cav.) Trin ex Steud (common
reed)
Herbaceous perennial plant, erect stems rise from
underground rhizome. The stems are 2–3 m tall,
green in the growing season, and pale brown in
winter. Blooms in summer with flowers at the top of
the stems, prefers sunny environment, and is fast-
growing and rapidly colonizes the land around the
original rhizome. This plant has been widely used
around the world for phytodepuration purposes and is
known to perform well in treatment wetlands (Head-
ley & Tanner, 2006).
Carex elata All. (tufted sedge)
Commonly used in floating treatment wetlands (Van
Acker et al., 2005), this species is a herbaceous plant,
evergreen, 0.5–1.2 m tall, flowering in spring with
flowers at the top of the green stems, and is adapted
to shady or sunny environments. Fully grown plants
form compact bushes.
Juncus effusus L. (soft rush)
Herbaceous perennial plant, evergreen, found world-
wide in wetlands and running waters. The stems are
cylindrical and flexible, 0.8–1.5 m tall, dark green;
123
Hydrobiologia (2011) 674:157–167
the small flowers appear at the top of the stems in
summer. Prefers sunny places, and withstands com-
plete flooding.
Typha latifolia L. (broadleaf cattail)
Another species already tested in floating treatment
wetlands around the world (Smith & Kalin, 2000;
Hubbard et al., 2004). A herbaceous perennial plant
with rhizomes. The leaves and flowering stems rise
from the underground rhizome network, the stems
may reach 3 m tall. The long leaves are linear and
dark brown. The mature flowers are brown and in a
sausage-shaped spike. Suited to living in many
different climatic conditions.
Chrysopogon zizanioides (L.) Roberty (vetiver grass)
A herbaceous perennial plant, with deep and resistant
root system and fast growth. The height is 0.5–1.5 m.
The leaves are erected and rather stiff. Vetiver grass
is an ‘‘ecological-climax’’ species. It withstands
drought and high levels of flooding. It is tolerant to
high levels of pesticides and herbicides and also to a
wide range of toxic and heavy metals and high level
of tolerance to soil salinity (Maffei, 2002). Used in a
floating system in Australia for sewage treatment
(Ash & Troung, 2003).
Sparganium erectum L. (bur reed)
Herbaceous perennial plant recommended as a spe-
cies in floating wetland applications to remove
nutrients from water (Lakatos, 1998). Its height is
0.4–0.8 m, and it is common in Europe.
Dactylis glomerata L. (orchardgrass)
A common herbaceous perennial species worldwide.
It is caespitose, has stems of 0.2–1.2 m tall, com-
pressed at the base. It has a deep root system and it is
frost, heat, and drought resistant. This species grows
in sunny environments but tolerates shade very well
(Pignatti, 1997).
Experimental design
The two experiments were carried out in sites at a
short distance from one to another in the upper
Hydrobiologia (2011) 674:157–167
reaches of the Sile River, which is the longest
resurgence river in Italy.
The first experiment was conducted in an aqua-
culture farm in the Sile River Natural Park, Veneto
Region from May 2005 to March 2006. The farm
uses groundwater to rear rainbow trout and dis-
charges the outflow directly into the Sile River. The
FTW is a single barrier composed of three lines of
floating vegetated elements, 1.5 m wide and perpen-
dicular to the water flow (velocity 0.09 m s-1), and
was installed in the final basin between the farm
Fig. 2 First experiment
layout
161
channel (8.0 m wide) and the Sile River (Fig. 2). No
trees are growing on the riverbanks, so the vegetation
of the barrier is well exposed to the sun. The FTW
also intercepted the effluent coming from an activated
sludge treatment plant that was used by the fish farm.
The floating system was initially planted with 100
plants of Chrysopogon zizanioides (16 plants per m2)
and later some of them were replaced with
Typha latifolia and Sparganium erectum uprooted
from the river banks; Dactilis glomerata colonized
spontaneously.
123
162 Hydrobiologia (2011) 674:157–167

Fig. 3 Second experiment

layout

Water analyses were conducted before and after Table 1 Parameters monitored in the two experiments
the phytodepuration system and water samples were Parameter Experiment 1 Experiment 2
collected every 2 weeks, for a total of 24 samplings.
Plants growth, roots development, and system surface pH x x
colonization were also evaluated during the study Temperature x x
period. The specific objective was to gain the first Electrical conductivity x x
indications on the efficiency of the FTW in terms of Dissolved oxygen x
water amelioration, plant adaptation, and ease of Chemical oxygen demand x x
management. Biological oxygen demand x
The second experiment was carried out from Total nitrogen x x
September 2006 till June 2008 in a Nature Reserve, Total Kjeldahl nitrogen x
called Oasi di Cervara in the Sile River Natural Park, to Ammonia nitrogen x
ameliorate water ecosystems characterized by unusual Nitrate nitrogen x x
and protected flora and fauna. Barriers were installed Total phosphorus x x
in two channels called Rosta and Piovega (Fig. 3). In Soluble phosphorus x
Rosta channel, two barriers 6.5 m long composed of Total suspended solids x
three lines of Tech-IA elements (2 9 3 design) were
set leaving a space of 3 m between them. In Piovega
channel, there were two barriers 8 m long, each
composed of two lines of elements (2 9 2 design); the Monitoring activities and data elaboration
barriers were 4 m apart. In both cases, the barriers
were installed from bank to bank of the channel. In both the experiments, the chemical and physical
A total of 624 plants of Carex elata, Dactilis parameters of water listed in Table 1 were measured.
glomerata, Juncus effusus, and Phragmites australis Samples were collected, frozen, and then analyzed
were used in the two experiments. Trees are growing within a few days. COD, total P, soluble P (PO4-P),
on the river banks at both sites, giving shade to the total N, ammonia nitrogen, and nitrate nitrogen were
barriers. analyzed with the spectrophotometer (spectrophotom-
Monitoring consisted of nine samplings during the eter DR2008 Hach-Lange and specific couvettes test
project, collecting 31 water samples; during each for each parameters). BOD5 was determined with the
sampling, water was collected before, after, and standard method for water analysis (Mecella, 2001).
sometime between the barriers. The depth of sampled The physical parameters, electrical conductivity, dis-
water was 10 cm. For every sample, nine parameters solved oxygen, and pH were measured with a Hach-
were evaluated (Table 1) for a total of 279 analyses. Lange HQD 40d portable digital instrument according
This experiment aimed to obtain information on the to standard methods (APHA, 1992). Observations on
effect of different barrier designs in treating water plants were made periodically, with particular atten-
with similar chemical characteristics. tion paid to establishment and root development.

123
Hydrobiologia (2011) 674:157–167
The data series of the parameters did not follow
normal distribution even after transformations. Thus,
statistical analyses were carried out with the non-
parametric test of Kruskal–Wallis and Box and
Whiskers were used to display the variability.
Results
Experiment 1
Sile River is a resurgence river and this feature leads
to particular environmental conditions. One impor-
tant feature, as suggested by the analysis (Fig. 4), is
that water temperature was quite steady at around
14°C throughout summer and autumn, then decreased
to 10–11°C; conversely the average air temperature
presented wide variability. Air temperature was
8–10°C higher than water during summer, then had
similar values in September until October and was
8–10°C lower in winter. This situation permitted
aquatic plants growth even in the winter season,
without stress due to temperature variations, espe-
cially for root systems.
Regarding vegetation, vetiver was not very suc-
cessful, because its establishment was slow and the
average depth of roots was 20 cm 1 month after
installation; in the following 5 months the root
growth was modest, reaching an average length of
34 cm at the end of the summer. On the contrary,
Typha latifolia and in particular Dactylis glomerata
gave the best performances in terms of roots
Fig. 4 First experiment:
water and air temperature
recorded from May to
December 2005
163
development. One month after set up Typha latifolia
had elongated its roots to a depth of 30 cm. Dactylis
glomerata, at the end of establishment, had an
average root depth of 35 cm; only 2 months later
the roots reached 75 cm and at the end of experiment
the length was 115 cm.
A general amelioration of the water quality was
attained when water flowed across the FTW. The
greatest effects were on COD and BOD, which
showed a reduction in the median and the variability
(Fig. 5). In particular, median values were reduced
from 15 to 5 mg l-1 (66% removal) for COD and
from 4.2 to 2 (52% removal) for BOD. It is important
to stress that the removal rate was higher in the
presence of the highest values entering the FTW
system. Concerning nutrients, different trends are
detectable for N and P. In the former the median
values remained unvaried before and after the
barriers, but the dispersion was modified. In fact,
before the barriers the data distribution was more
dispersed in the field of values higher than the
median, while after the barriers distribution was the
opposite. Considering the two analyzed forms of N,
total N, and NO3-N, the latter was predominant and
that more subjected to amelioration. The median of
total P was reduced from 0.55 mg l-1 before the
barrier to 0.19 mg l-1 after (65% removal), while the
distribution around the median was not modified.
Soluble phosphorus (ortho P) had very low values,
not always detectable (molybdate reactive phosphate
method, detection limit 0.02 mg l-1 (Murphy &
Riley, 1962)).
123
164 Hydrobiologia (2011) 674:157–167

Fig. 5 First experiment:

Box-plot diagrams of
chemical oxygen demand
(COD), biological oxygen
demand (BOD),
concentrations of total
nitrogen (tot N) and total
phosphorus (tot P) before
(=in) and after (=out) the
floating treatment wetland
systems

Table 2 First experiment: selected parameters measured before (=in) and after (=out) the floating treatment wetland systems
Parameters (%) Suspended solids Electrical conductivity (lS cm-1) pH
In Out In Out In Out

25 323 320 635 640 7.2 7.1

50 350 320 645 645 7.3 7.2
75 390 348 730 650 7.4 7.2
Values are given as percentiles

The passage through the rooted filter also involved
a slight but significant decrease in suspended solids,
that is visible considering the median and the 75th
percentile (Table 2); the electrical conductivity of
water was reduced only at higher values, while pH
values were reduced considering the 25th, 50th, and
75th percentiles.
Experiment 2
The species used (Carex elata, Dactilis glomerata,
Juncus effusus, and Phragmites australis) showed a
good adaptation to local conditions. At the time of
installation plants were at a very early stage of
development, but after 1 month the length of the root
systems was already 20 cm. In August 2007, almost
1 year from the start of the project, the roots were
90 cm long. A slight decrease in numbers of plants
was recorded in the barriers of both channels,
probably due to the shading by the trees living on
the banks and due to the competition from submer-
gent macrophytes living in the water, especially in the
2 9 2 site.
The more interesting effects of FTWs on water
characteristics have been observed for COD, total N,
and NO3-N (Fig. 6).
The 2 9 3 design gave a slightly better perfor-
mance than the 2 9 2 in reducing COD concentra-
tion, with the median values being abated from 13.9
to 8.7 mg l-1 (38% removal) in the former and from
12.5 to 9.0 mg l-1 (28%) in the latter. The 2 9 3
design was also able to compact the dispersion of
data around the medians.
The two designs performed similarly on NO3-N,
reducing the incoming concentrations by 12% (2 9 3
design) and 14% (2 9 2). This inorganic N

123
Hydrobiologia (2011) 674:157–167
Fig. 6 Second experiment:
Box-plot diagrams of
chemical oxygen demand
(COD), concentrations of
total nitrogen (tot N) and
nitrate N (NO3-N) before
(=in) and after (=out) the
2 9 3 and 2 9 2 floating
treatment wetland systems
represented almost all the total N, which was abated
by 13% by the 2 9 3 design and by 29% by the
2 9 2 design.
At the Rosta site (2 9 3 installation) pH values
were all close to 7 and dissolved oxygen had a
median of 8.7 mg l-1, while at Piovega medians of
pH and dissolved oxygen were 7.3 and 5.5 mg l-1,
respectively. In both cases, the values were not
significantly affected by the FTWs.
Discussion
The two experiments were conducted in the upper
reaches of the Sile River, a resurgence river that
showed similar chemical conditions in the experi-
mental sites and years. The water quality in the river
165
was generally good, with low COD and NO3-N
concentration that met the EU threshold for drinking
water (50 mg l-1 for NO3-). Both sites are located
inside the Sile River Natural Park and this stimulated
the desire to test the FTWs to achieve a further
amelioration of the water in a very fragile environ-
ment. In fact, there is intensive human activity in the
area with severe risks of compromising water quality
and aquatic life, leading to the implementation of
protection measures. In particular, many aquaculture
farms are located in the area, given the favorable
features of the resurgence water (almost steady
conditions of flow, composition and temperature
through the year that favor trout growth). In this
scenario, the FTWs might represent a feasible
solution to mitigate the environmental impact of this
activity.
123
166
The correct selection and installation of vegetation
is a key factor to guarantee rapid establishment and
root development, which is essential for the prompt
functioning of the system. The attempt to use vetiver
grass, a nonnative species, was justified by its highly
promising features to be used for depuration pur-
poses, but was not successful in terms of establish-
ment and development. This species is known for its
wide capacity to adapt to various water regime
conditions, but probably its temperature requirements
were not fully satisfied, limiting growth and compet-
itive capacity. Better performances have been
achieved with native species, well adapted to the
environment, such as common reed, cattail, sedges,
and bur reed. Surprising but promising results have
been obtained with orchardgrass, a species commonly
used for pasture but not known for phytodepuration
purposes. Indeed, it was able to rapidly develop a
deep and diffused root system even living directly in
water. This was not expected because orchardgrass is
known to be sensitive to water-logging. In the first
experiment, it spontaneously colonized the floating
system probably because the good natural oxygen
availability of the water was not limiting for root
growth. This positive response suggested using the
species also in the second experiment, which con-
firmed its validity.
In the experiments the concentrations of pollutants
were low and the residence time in the FTWs was
reduced, given the velocity of the water flow.
Nonetheless, the barriers gave interesting perfor-
mances in terms of pollutant abatement. The higher
removal was observed on COD (together with BOD
in the first experiment), suggesting that a combined
action of filtering and biological degradation takes
place in the root environment. Comparing the dep-
uration efficiency on COD observed in first experi-
ment (removal of 66%) with the values we find in
bibliography (removal from 37% to 95%), it stands
around the average, but for the second experiment
values are lower (removal of 29–38%). For BOD,
mean removal values of 52% in the first experiment,
was higher in comparison with those found by Revitt
et al. (2001) and Billore et al. (2008), which stands
from 37 to 45%. The effects on nitrogen were less
evident but still significant, with removal mainly of
the nitrate fraction. This can be the combined result
of plant-microbes uptake and some denitrification.
Total N removal was actually lower than the values
123
Hydrobiologia (2011) 674:157–167
we can find in bibliography, while nitrate removal is
closer to them (Lianpeng et al., 2009).
Lower and contrasting results between the two
experiments have been obtained for P. Important
removal (65%) was only detected in the first exper-
iment, probably because the median content in the
water was one order of magnitude higher than in the
second one. In other works, we found the removal
was lower (Hubbard et al., 2004; Van Acker et al.,
2005; Van de Moortel, 2008).
Conclusions
This study evaluated the potential of floating wetland
systems to work in running water conditions. Although
the systems were monitored only during the first year
after installation, a good development of roots and
significant effects on pollutant removal were detected
in both experiments. The highest depuration efficiency
was attained on COD (66% in the first experiment,
29–38% in the second) and BOD, but also N (partic-
ularly nitrate form) and total P (in the presence of the
higher entering concentration) were abated. Regarding
the second experiment, the settings with 2 barriers
formed by 2 lines versus 2 barriers of 3 lines of floating
elements gave slightly contrasting results, since the
first scheme was more efficient in treating nitrogen, the
second in treating COD.
The Tech-IA floating system was very easy to
install and manage and did not give any problems as
plants grew in flowing water conditions. It also
performed very well in terms of buoyancy and
stability even when single elements were joined
together to form multi-line barriers. In spite of severe
weather events during the project no damage to the
systems was observed. A floating wetland system
may be used as an in-stream water treatment that is
easy to install and manage and effective in control-
ling pollutants if suitable vegetation is chosen and
planted.
References
APHA, 1992. Microbiological examination of water. In Stan-
dard methods evaluation of water one wastewater 18th ed.
American Public Health Association, Washington, DC.
Hydrobiologia (2011) 674:157–167
Ash, R. & P. Troung, 2003. The use of Vetiver grass wetlands
for sewerage treatment in Australia. In Procceding of 3rd
International Conference on Vetiver, Guangzhou, China.
Billore, S., K. Prashant, J. K. Sharma, N. Singh, H. Ram, P.
Dass & R. Jain, 2008. Restoration and conservation of
stagnant water bodies by gravel-bed treatmen ands and
artificial floating reed beds in tropical India. In Billore, S.,
P. Dass & J. Vymazal (eds), Proceedings of the 11th
International Conference on Wetland Systems for Water
Pollution Control, Vol. 1, Institute of Environment Man-
agement and Plant Sciences, Vikram University, Ujjain,
India: 408–414.
Headley, T. R. & C. C. Tanner, 2006. Applications of floating
wetlands for enhanced stormwater treatment: a review.
Auckland Regional Council, Technical Publication,
Auckland.
Hoeger, S., 1988. SCHWIMMKAMPEN Germany’s artificial
floating island. Journal of Soil Water Conservation 43:
304–306.
Hogg, E. H. & R. W. Wein, 1988. The contribution of Thypa
components to floating mat buoyancy. Ecology 69:
1025–1031.
Hubbard, R. K., G. J. Gascho & G. L. Newton, 2004. Use of
floating vegetation to remove nutrients from swine lagoon
wastewater. Transactions of the ASAE, American Society
of Agricultural Engineers 47: 1963–1972.
Lakatos, G., 1998. Hungary. In Vymazal, J., H. Brix, P.
F. Cooper, M. B. Green & R. Haberl (eds), Constructed
Wetlands for Wastewater Treatment in Europe. Backhuys
Publishers, Leiden, The Netherlands: 191–206.
Lianpeng, S., L. Yang & J. Hui, 2009. Nitrogen removal from
polluted river by enhanced floating bed grown canna.
Ecological Engineering 35: 135–140.
Maffei, M., 2002. Vetiveria: the genus Vetiveria. CRC Press,
Boca Raton.
Mecella, G., 2001. Metodi di analisi delle acque di scolo per
uso agricolo e zootecnico. Franco Angeli editore.
View publication stats
167
Murphy, J. & J. P. Riley, 1962. A modified single solution
method for the determination of phosphate in natural
waters. Analytical Chemistry Acta 27: 31–37.
Nakamura, K. & Y. Shimatani, 1997. Water purification and
environmental enhancement by the floating wetland. In
Proceeding of Asia WATERQUAL’ 97, IAWQ: 888–895.
Pignatti, S., 1997. Flora d’Italia. Volume terzo. Bologna: Ed-
agricole – Edizioni Agricole della Calderini s.r.l. Re-
gelsberger M., 2005. Swamp Guidelines, A project under
the Energy, Environment and Sustainable Development
Programme of the 5th Framework Programme. Published
by Arbeitsgemeinschaft ERNEUERBARE ENERGIE
GMBH. ISBN 3-901425-99-3: 132.
Revitt, D. M., P. Worrall & D. Brewer, 2001. The integration
of constructed wetlands into a treatment system for airport
runoff. Water Science and Technology 44: 469–476.
Sasser et al., 1991. Distribution of nitrogen and phosphorus in a
Louisiana freshwater floating marsh. Aquatic Botany 41:
317–331.
Schulz, C., J. Gelbrecht & B. Rennert, 2003. Treatment of
rainbow trout farm effluents in constructed wetland with
emergent plants and subsurface horizontal water flow.
Aquaculture 217: 207–221.
Smith, M. P. & M. Kalin, 2000. Floating wetland vegetation
covers for suspended solids removal. Treatment wetlands
for water quality improvement. In Proceeding of Quebec
2000 Conference, CH2MHILL, Canada.
Van Acker, J., L. Buts, C. Thoeye & G. de Gueldre, 2005.
Floating plant beds: BAT for CSO treatment? Book of
abstracts from international symposium on wetland pol-
lutant dynamics and control, September 4–8, 2005, Ghent,
Belgium: 186–187.
Van de Moortel, A. M. K., 2008. In 11th International Con-
ference on Urban Drainage, Edinburgh Scotland, UK.
Ying Feng, L., J. Shuh Ren, L. Der Yuan & W. Tze Wen, 2002.
Nutrient removal from aquaculture wastewater using a
constructed wetlands system. Aquaculture 209: 169–184.
123